Good Energy

“It was increasingly becoming clear to me that although I was surrounded by practitioners who got into medicine to help patients, the reality is that every institution that impacts health—from medical schools to insurance companies to hospitals to pharma companies—makes money on ‘managing’ disease, not curing patients.”

This excerpt uses a logical critique to highlight systemic flaws in modern healthcare. By juxtaposing the altruistic intentions of individual practitioners with the profit-driven motives of institutions, Means exposes a dissonance that undermines the mission of medicine. The argument shifts blame from individuals to entrenched systems, which invites readers to question their own trust in conventional healthcare. This logical structure reinforces her broader argument for prevention and holistic care, positioning it as a necessary alternative to a system incentivized by chronic illness.

“When in doubt, always start by asking questions.”

Means’s perspective reflects a commitment to the foundational principle of inquiry—seeing the “why” behind observable phenomena. By acknowledging the limitations of her own knowledge and the importance of remaining open to new information or new approaches, Means imbues her narrative tone with humility. Adopting this mindset also allows Means to model a thoughtful, patient-centered approach to health that values exploration over assumption.

“Something became blatantly clear: if we truly want to restore general health in the body and mind, we must look one layer deeper than the mechanism of inflammation alone and into the very center of the cells themselves.”

This quote defines Means’s shift from a surface-level approach to a more profound, root-caused analysis of health issues. By emphasizing the need to look “one layer deeper,” she advocates for a deeper understanding of cellular processes as the foundation for addressing chronic diseases, highlighting The Link Between Cellular Health and Energy Production as a central theme in the text. The language—specifically “blatantly clear”—adds urgency and decisiveness to her argument, reinforcing her belief in the importance of addressing metabolic dysfunction at the cellular level. This perspective challenges reductionist paradigms and encourages a more integrative and comprehensive approach to health.

“It’s this simple: kids’ bodies, just like adult bodies, are made of cells that need energy to function. Our children are living in disastrous metabolic conditions, and their bodies are paying the price—while leaders in nutrition science (which is largely funded by food companies) and ‘health care’ (whose research is largely funded by pharmaceutical companies to ‘manage’ the rise of metabolic conditions) stand silent.”

Means critiques the systemic failures in healthcare and nutrition science. By directly linking children’s worsening health to the complacency of industry leaders, Means highlights a lack of accountability within institutions tasked with safeguarding public health. The accusation that nutrition science is “funded by food companies” and healthcare research by “pharmaceutical companies” exposes conflicts of interest that prioritize profit over prevention. This criticism underscores Means’s call for a more transparent and proactive approach to addressing metabolic dysfunction, particularly in vulnerable populations like children.

“Bad Energy will almost certainly result in more serious conditions down the road if left unaddressed.”

This statement uses definitive rhetoric to emphasize the urgency of addressing metabolic dysfunction. Phrases like “almost certainly” and “if left unaddressed” position Bad Energy as a ticking time bomb, drawing a cause-and-effect relationship between poor metabolic health and chronic diseases. The claim appeals to logic, presenting a clear and preventable progression of harm. By framing Bad Energy as a precursor to serious conditions, Means encourages readers to take immediate action to improve their health.

“The doctor was not consciously trying to recommend a suboptimal procedure, but I knew the invasive route would generate hundreds of thousands of dollars for the hospital, and this doctor’s pay was tied to booking these procedures.”

Rather than blaming individuals, Means focuses on systemic critique, highlighting the structural flaws in modern healthcare. By emphasizing the doctor was not “consciously trying” to act against the patient’s best interest, Means positions herself as an ally to the reader, vilifying the healthcare system as a whole rather than individual doctors who work within a flawed system. This approach humanizes medical practitioners and fosters empathy, encouraging readers to see them as constrained by a flawed system rather than as malicious actors.

“Today, we understand more about how our cars, finances, and computers work at any given moment than we do about the function of our own bodies.”

Means’s message that individuals must take control of their health by becoming more informed about their bodies points to The Role of Lifestyle Factors in Overall Health as a central theme of the text. The comparison to cars and computers serves as sharp social criticism, highlighting a cultural tendency to prioritize external knowledge over self-awareness. By framing this disparity as both ironic and concerning, Means underscores the urgency of using accessible tools and resources to bridge the gap, empowering readers to view their health as a personal responsibility rather than a passive reliance on medical systems.

“The NIH defines addiction as ‘a chronic, relapsing disorder characterized by compulsive drug seeking and use despite adverse consequences,’ which is obviously what is happening when it comes to modern industrial food.”

Means employs logos by drawing a logical connection between the NIH’s definition of addiction and behaviors associated with industrial food consumption. She uses the authoritative definition to argue that processed foods meet the same criteria as addictive substances, reinforcing the validity of her comparison. The reference to the NIH adds credibility, aligning her argument with a trusted institution and making her argument more persuasive. By framing food addiction as a scientifically recognized phenomenon, Means urges readers to view the issue with the same seriousness as drug addiction.

“Inside your mother’s body, you were 3D printed out of food, and every item you ingest continues to print the next iteration of yourself.”

This vivid metaphor emphasizes the profound impact of food on human development and ongoing health. By likening the body to a 3D printer, Means underscores how every dietary choice contributes to the structure and function of the body, both in utero and throughout life. This remark highlights the importance of mindful eating, stressing that food is not just fuel but the very material from which the body is built. The imagery makes the concept accessible and compelling, encouraging readers to consider how their food choices shape their health and future.

“The food industry’s influence on studies had led the current guidelines to say that 10 percent of a child’s diet can come from added refined sugar, which should be unequivocally zero percent.”

This quote highlights how conflicts of interest between the food industry and scientific research can influence public health policy, leading to recommendations that may not align with optimal health outcomes. By pointing to the allowance of refined sugar in children’s diets, Means exposes the systemic failures that prioritize corporate interests over public welfare. Her strong language—”unequivocally zero percent”—underscores her belief that these guidelines are not based on unbiased science but rather shaped by profit-driven motives, reinforcing her argument for independent, evidence-based nutrition standards.

“Here’s a possibly uncomfortable truth: you will either pay for healthy food up front or you will pay for preventable medical issues and lost productivity in the future.”

This statement employs a logical framework to encourage readers to prioritize healthier food choices by framing the decision as an investment in long-term well-being. However, this argument assumes that all individuals have access to unprocessed, nutrient-rich foods. It overlooks systemic issues like food deserts, where fresh produce and whole foods are scarce, and the reliance of food banks on shelf-stable processed items. These barriers mean that an unprocessed diet is not universally accessible, which complicates the binary choice Means presents.

“I’m not suggesting we go back to prehistoric times and ban artificial light, homes, or digital technology. But I think society should step back and appreciate how new and biologically disruptive these inventions are and how closely they are linked to our profound rates of mental and physical dysfunction rooted in Bad Energy.”

Means’s statement encourages striking a balance between embracing modern conveniences and recognizing their biological impacts. By explicitly stating that she does not advocate abandoning technology, she implies her advice is practical and achievable. Her call to “step back and appreciate” the disruptions modern inventions cause emphasizes the importance of aligning with natural chronobiology. This measured approach invites readers to consider how they can integrate balance into their lifestyles without feeling overwhelmed by the idea of rejecting modernity entirely.

“We are not made to go without regular, consistent sleep in a single time zone. And until the last split second of human evolution, we likely never did.”

This quote highlights the newness of modern lifestyles, framing them as evolutionary mismatches that strain human biology. By contrasting humanity’s long evolutionary history with recent technological and societal changes, Means underscores how poorly adapted humans are to erratic sleep patterns and artificial disruptions. This perspective reinforces her broader argument that health issues rooted in “Bad Energy” are preventable if people align their behaviors—such as sleep schedules—with their evolutionary chronobiology. The emphasis on the “last split second” also adds urgency to her message, illustrating how swiftly these changes have impacted health.

“We celebrate our comfortable, seated, climate-controlled world as a win—and to some extent, it is! But the reality is these factors of modern life conspire to lull our cells into a state of cellular complacency.”

Means juxtaposes the perceived benefits of modern conveniences with their hidden health costs, framing them as contributors to “cellular complacency.” The phrase “lull our cells” personifies cellular function, emphasizing the subtle but significant impact of sedentary lifestyles and stable environments on metabolic health.

“It is ironic that we pay for the luxury of comfort and then are sold solutions to remedy the resulting deficiencies.”

Means highlights the paradox of modern consumer culture, critiquing how comfort and convenience lead to health problems that industries then monetize through “remedies.” This irony exposes the cyclical nature of modern lifestyles, where individuals invest in comfort only to face consequences that require additional spending. By framing these cycles as a systemic issue, Means highlights Strategies for Fostering “Good Energy” by encouraging readers to question societal norms and consider preventative measures, such as incorporating natural movement and exposure to temperature fluctuations, rather than relying on expensive post-hoc solutions.

“Since World War II, over eighty thousand synthetic chemicals have entered our environment and approximately fifteen hundred new chemicals are released each year, many of which have never been tested for safety in adults, children, or fetuses.”

This statistic-based statement emphasizes the pervasive presence of synthetic chemicals in modern environments, underscoring a key point in Means’s argument about the health risks associated with industrialization. The mention of untested chemicals, particularly their potential effects on vulnerable populations like children and fetuses, adds urgency and emotional weight to her critique of lax regulatory practices. By tying this issue to the broader theme of cellular health, Means reinforces the need for individuals to minimize chemical exposure while advocating for systemic changes to protect public health.

“But in the span of just a century, we now have the technological capability to be exposed to the threats facing any person, anywhere in the world, twenty-four hours a day, all live-streamed to a screen in our hands. Overnight, the traumas and fears of eight billion others have all become ours to process.”

This quote underscores the overwhelming nature of modernity by emphasizing the rapid and unprecedented shift in how humans experience fear. Means’s juxtaposition of the vast, global scale of threats with the personal immediacy of “a screen in our hands” highlights how technology has magnified exposure to stressors. The phrase “overnight” reinforces the suddenness of this change in the context of human history, leaving people ill-equipped to process such a flood of information. This framing illustrates the disconnect between human evolution and modern technological realities, reinforcing Means’s argument that chronic stress is a significant contributor to Bad Energy and poor health.

“The impact we have on others—the people we love, the people we mistreat, the people we teach, the people who read our writing—literally changes their biology and lives forever.”

Means blends spiritual and scientific ideology to reflect on human connection and influence. By asserting that our interactions “literally change” others’ biology, Means bridges the gap between abstract emotional experiences and tangible biological impacts. The repetition of “the people we” emphasizes the diverse ways humans leave lasting impressions on others, inspiring readers to reflect on the power of their actions. This sentiment enhances the text’s inspirational quality, urging readers to approach their relationships and choices with intentionality and care.

“We are animals in cages right now, surrounded by encroaching threats that are entering our homes and daily lives through technology, chemicals, and more.”

The imagery in this quote evokes a sense of entrapment and vulnerability, likening modern humans to caged animals exposed to constant dangers. The phrase “encroaching threats” suggests an insidious and pervasive invasion, heightening the urgency of Means’s critique of modern lifestyles. By combining vivid language with a stark metaphor, Means effectively conveys the suffocating impact of technology, environmental toxins, and other stressors, reinforcing her argument that modernity is at odds with human biology. This visual advises readers to recognize and address these influences to reclaim control over their health and well-being.

“The goal of this plan isn’t to commit to all habits at once; it is to instill a mindset shift and embark on a path of curiosity that is sustainable.”

Means emphasizes sustainability and personal growth rather than perfection throughout Good Energy. By framing the plan as a “mindset shift” rather than a rigid list of actions, she encourages readers to approach their health journey with flexibility and self-compassion. The focus on curiosity reinforces her empowering tone, inviting individuals to explore what works for them instead of feeling pressured to master everything immediately. This approach aligns with the book’s broader theme of fostering long-term Good Energy through incremental, achievable changes.

“Values reflect your personal, unique judgment on what is important in life and why you want to be alive. Your choices and behaviors are how you show the world—and more importantly, yourself—what those values are.”

Means connects health habits to a deeper sense of identity and purpose, encouraging readers to ground their choices in their personal values. This perspective elevates the discussion of Good Energy habits from mere practicality to a reflection of one’s core beliefs and intentions. By tying behaviors to values, Means asks readers to see their health choices as meaningful expressions of who they are, fostering intrinsic motivation to implement and sustain these habits over time.

“There is no destination—but I am convinced the commitment to daily actions that respect our cells is the secret to a happy life.”

This quote highlights the ongoing, process-oriented nature of fostering Good Energy. By rejecting the idea of a fixed “destination,” Means reframes health as a lifelong journey rather than a finite goal, alleviating pressure to achieve perfection. The phrase “respect our cells” personalizes and humanizes cellular health, reinforcing the importance of daily habits as a means to well-being. This sentiment reflects the book’s overarching message: happiness and health are built through consistent, intentional actions that align with the body’s natural needs.

“A pasture-raised egg has about double the omega-3s that a conventionally raised egg has.”

This statement exemplifies the detailed explanations Means incorporates into her recipes, enhancing their educational value. In this case, she highlights the nutritional differences between egg-raising methods, connecting such dietary choices to her broader principles of Good Energy, emphasizing the importance of quality ingredients. Such details not only inform readers but also encourage them to make healthier, more intentional food decisions, reinforcing the practical application of Means’s nutritional philosophy.